By how much do you think MFP overestimates calories burned?

Options
HealthFreak1967
HealthFreak1967 Posts: 116 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
what do you guys think? or does it depend on the workout?

Replies

  • Halleeon
    Halleeon Posts: 309 Member
    Options
    Idk...but this is why I bought a heart rate monitor.
  • Pebble321
    Pebble321 Posts: 6,554 Member
    Options
    Who knows?
    Even if you use a heart rate monitor you are still only getting an estimate. It is quite probably a better estimate than MFP because it uses your heart rate (mostly, though my Garmion 405 doesn't use this) but there is still no way to know if it's accurate.

    Just pick one system and try it for a month or so. If you are logging your food and exercise as accurately as you can but aren't getting the results you expect then you have a clue that something isn't right.

    I lost weight very steadily last year using MFP exercise calorie estimates - so they worked OK for me.
  • kenjancef
    kenjancef Posts: 63 Member
    Options
    I use Nike+, been using it for the past 3 years now. I think I read somewhere that the one factor that helps in counting burned calories is that if you can enter your weight in on the settings, so it knows that. I could be wrong though. But what I do when I enter cardio (running) is put the time in, then modify the calorie amount that gets put in to the amount on my Nike+. Most of the time they are close, but I have no reason not to trust the Nike+. When I enter walking I just use the amount that MFP chooses for me.
  • jessiecoody
    jessiecoody Posts: 15 Member
    Options
    I was wondering the same thing today. I bust tail at work, but not near as much as I did when I did warehouse work and it claims I burn over 1200 calories per shift. I don't see that being correct.
  • OlsenG318
    OlsenG318 Posts: 37
    Options
    Depending on the activity, I'd say it probably overestimates by at least 30-40%.

    edit: basically what everyone else is going to say, get a heart rate monitor.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    Who cares? Losing weight has nothing to do with burning calories.
  • jmagdalena707
    jmagdalena707 Posts: 28 Member
    Options
    I compared 45 minutes of cardio on the elliptical and it was off by 35% based on the HRM.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    It's OK for walking and running.
  • HealthFreak1967
    HealthFreak1967 Posts: 116 Member
    Options
    Who cares? Losing weight has nothing to do with burning calories.

    sarcastic negative BLEH!
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    Who cares? Losing weight has nothing to do with burning calories.

    sarcastic negative BLEH!

    He is a crotchety old man.
    (who knows a hell of a lot about what he's talking about though)
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    Who cares? Losing weight has nothing to do with burning calories.

    sarcastic negative BLEH!

    He is a crotchety old man.
    (who knows a hell of a lot about what he's talking about though)

    This is true. The crotchety old part, at least. But I'm not sure being sarcastic the slightest. Negative, well, you got me there.

    But I'm serious as a heart attack. Getting in shape has nothing to do with anything calories burned. It's about getting better. Become a better runner. A better lifter. A better cyclist. A better eater. Throw away your HRMs. Get a stopwatch. Do what you did last week but do it faster. Or run longer. Get a pen and paper. Do the same lifts you did last week but put more weight on the bar. Rinse, repeat. Then look in the mirror 6 months from now. You won't recognize yourself.

    You've got the right idea that there are numbers that can help you get in shape. But it's not the numbers on MFP. Nor your HRM. They are right there on your stopwatch.
  • kingscrown
    kingscrown Posts: 615 Member
    Options
    I use a Polar Heart monitor to make sure I exercise as hard as I should. By product is it tells me how many calories burned. I use it as a guide to when I can leave the gym. I won't leave until I've burned at least 500 calories. Anyhow when I go to post my calories burned on MFP it over estimates, but hundreds of calories. I'm always so surprised at how high it is off. I just adjust it to my heart monitor and move on.
  • windycitycupcake
    windycitycupcake Posts: 516 Member
    Options
    elliptical says 700 and mfp says 935.

    thats 235 calories off!
  • DLMinus10
    DLMinus10 Posts: 6
    Options
    I do think that it overestimates. I use a heart strap/watch which give me loads of stats but also calories burned. (It's suunto where you log your height/weight/age etc prior to using). I take those #s and input them.
  • Punchabear
    Punchabear Posts: 42
    Options
    MFP has been for the most part pretty close to what my hrm tells me. One way or another, it's helping.
  • Ruthe8
    Ruthe8 Posts: 423 Member
    Options
    For heaven's sake, if it overestimated by a specific amount, they would just change it.
  • capnrus789
    capnrus789 Posts: 2,736 Member
    Options
    I think it underestimates. I use runkeeper in my iPhone and it's always higher, whether it's tracking walking, jogging, or cycling. I use another website to estimate the my burn, too, and it's always higher than MFP. I'd rather it underestimate, though, makes sure I don't go over my daily calories by thinking I've burned more than I have.
  • ksemien
    ksemien Posts: 133 Member
    Options
    In my experience it overestimates a great deal. I know full well I am not burning the calories it calculates. I use a HRM (when working out) and a BMR (wear it non-stop except in water). For me that's been what's worked for me and I've seen the best results. If I used the MFP calculations and logged them, I'd be totally gaining weight. Good luck!
  • LadyIvysMom
    LadyIvysMom Posts: 391 Member
    Options
    For walking and running, I use a pedometer app that uses GPS, weight, speed and amount of time. It's fairly accurate. So I just use that.

Categories